RFA seems to be a clinically effective tool that reduces ESS scores and RDI levels in patients with OSA syndrome. The procedure should be considered a valid treatment option for patients who refuse or are unable to tolerate continuous positive airway pressure.

We performed an extensive review of the literature to compare the efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) to surgical resection, the current standard of care, in the treatment of adults with early-stage (T1-2N0M0) squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the oral cavity. Since patients who receive PDT are chosen with a high degree of selectivity, particular care was taken when extracting data for comparison. For outcomes measures, PDT was assessed in terms of a complete response to therapy, and surgery was evaluated in terms of locoregional control. Recurrences were also analyzed. We found 24 studies—12 for each treatment—to compare for this meta-analysis. In comparing a complete response to PDT and locoregional control with surgery, we found no statistically significant difference (mean difference [MD]: 1.166; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.479 to 2.839). With respect to recurrences, again no statistically significant difference was observed (MD: 0.552; 95% CI: 0.206 to 1.477). We conclude that PDT is as effective as primary surgical resection for the treatment of early-stage SCC of the oral cavity and that it is a valid function-preserving approach to treatment.

Objectives 1) Study efficacy of 2 methods of immediate static facial suspension after total composite parotidectomy, facial nerve sacrifice & free flap reconstruction. 2) Compare these regarding outcomes & patient satisfaction. Methods Retrospective review 2005–08 of all patients at academic tertiary referral center with advanced H&N malignancy necessitating extirpation, including parotidectomy, CN-VII sacrifice, and microvascular reconstruction. Ipsilateral face addressed simultaneously with either acellular human dermal allograft (AHDA) ‘sling’ or suture suspension (SS). Follow-up 2–18 months. Outcomes assessed: suspension status (commissure symmetry 1–4 complete ptosis), overall aesthetics (excellent 1–4 unsatisfactory), oral competence (no drooling 1–3 constant drooling) and patient/family satisfaction scores (very satisfied 1–4 very dissatisfied). Results 9 patients underwent extirpation, CNVII sacrifice, fasciocutaneous microvascular reconstruction (forearm, ALT or parascapula) and facial suspension. 8 received postoperative radiation; 1 expired. 2 underwent AHDA facial ‘slings.’ 7 underwent SS using polybutilate-coated braided polyester (Ethibond Excel). Both techniques used 3 distal suspension sites (nasolabial crease, upper/lower commissure) and proximal zygomatic stablization. Suspension grades were 1–3 for AHDA, 1–2 for SS; aesthetic 2–3 for AHDA, 1–3 for SS; competence 2 for AHDA, 1–2 for SS; satisfaction 1–2 for AHDA, 1–2 for SS. Conclusions Facial nerve rehabilitation in post-extirpative oncologic setting remains challenging for optimizing function/aesthetics. In our series of patients undergoing extensive resection with facial nerve sacrifice and free flap reconstruction, suture suspension provided slightly better oral symmetry and overall aesthetics compared to AHDA ‘sling’ suspension. Patient satisfaction was high in both groups. Long-term follow-up and greater sample size are needed to determine if any observed advantage is real and sustained.

No abstract